International Trade committee  I think we're trying to tidy the regulation legislation from a domestic point of view. We're not trying to interfere with any of the trade aspects of this. We're fully supportive of having that in-transit provision put into WTO. We want to make sure that the regulations are adhered to with respect to cleaning products only having 0.5% of phosphorus in them.

International Trade committee  That's an interesting question. I don't know. I'd have to get back to you on that.

International Trade committee  Since it's for in-transit purposes, you would be bringing something in and it would be for another final destination, so it wouldn't be manufactured here, per se. A lot of our member companies manufacture on a North American basis, and for the domestic market we're quite a mix of different products.

International Trade committee  The importance for our members is that if you sell in North America, you still have a Canadian label for pesticides and you'll have a U.S. label. They're very different. The use patterns are often different. The directions to consumers would be different. For us, in terms of the comments around the webinar, it was making sure that the definition we currently have is good for us domestically at home, as well as for meeting our trade obligations.

International Trade committee  Thank you.

International Trade committee  Do you mean the amendment we're making in CEPA? Yes, we think that the in-transit provision can be managed through the regulatory process, and we know they're going to have to change the regulations anyway. There's only one set of regulations currently under the nutrient section that's for our members' products.

International Trade committee  Under CEPA, we already are harmonized from our members' perspectives. On a North American basis, we sell those cleaning products with the same amount of phosphorous at 0.5% per weight, so there won't be any issues with consumers having products that make their dishes sparkly. With respect to labels, Pierre, did you want to say anything?

International Trade committee  Good morning, Mr. Chair, and members of Parliament. It's a pleasure to be here today to provide our perspective to the committee's review of Bill C-13. My name is Shannon Coombs and I'm the president of the Canadian Consumer Specialty Products Association. For 18 years I've proudly represented the many accomplishments of our proactive and responsible industry.

International Trade committee  With that proposed amendment, we are looking to ensure predictability in the Canadian marketplace while meeting our trade obligations under WTO. CCSPA is proposing amendments for two of the acts under discussion, the Pest Control Products Act and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act.

Environment committee  As I had mentioned in my statement, we think there's a real opportunity for the government to provide more information to consumers in a meaningful way to let them know how the substances have been assessed, what it means to them in terms of their own health, and what the outcomes are, or what the government is doing for particular substances that have been assessed.

Environment committee  As it currently stands, CEPA is doing a very good job. There were a lot of recommendations put forward by this committee in 2006. There was an interim government response in 2007, and there are a lot of things that the government has acted upon, some of which include cumulative assessments; taking account of cancer end-points in the risk assessment; dealing with vulnerable populations in the risk assessment; and making sure there are adequate funds for the CMP process.

Environment committee  The way the act is constructed, there is virtual elimination and then there is prohibition. Virtual elimination is about limiting contaminants in an effluent, as an example, whereas prohibition is about banning the manufacture. That is what, I think, you're trying to get at. I'm not sure if maybe we need some explanation from the officials on what the difference is and how you get on the list.

Environment committee  Thank you for the question, Madam Chair. I fear that red card.

Environment committee  Okay, thank you. To us, Canadians are confident about the products that they use. They and their ingredients are regulated. They are safe when used according to the product's directions. We have a lot of various laws governing our products, not just CEPA, that are risk based. That's the construct of how we provide safe and effective products to Canadians.

Environment committee  Once we see the assessments being completed in 2020, we will effectively be in a reassessment phase. The two departments have done a really good job of identifying what that evaluation process is and all the triggers they have for reassessment, some of which are legislated, like sections 70 and 75 of the bill, and also other feeders as well.